I think there might be a significant overlay of Trump and Bernie voters

After Bernie lost to Hillary for the Democratic nomination (in 2016), I heard a lot of his supporters went to Trump. Comedian Roseanne Barr was one of the more famous ones, who supported Bernie and then went all out for Trump after HRC won the nomination.

Trump and Bernie don't even like each other, but they share supporters. I think it is due to both being somewhat of extremists (in terms of U.S. politics). It's known as the horseshoe theory where the extremes start to get closer to each other and become somewhat similar.

Trump and Bernie don't even like each other, but they share supporters. I think it is due to both being somewhat of extremists (in terms of U.S. politics). It's known as the horseshoe theory where the extremes start to get closer to each other and become somewhat similar.

I think it's more about establishment and anti-establishment, although Bernie has lost a bit of cred in this space after he folded like a deckchair to the DNC, and given how disproportionately wealthy he has become whilst in office... hence some of the defections.

"He goes to hell, the one who asserts what didn’t take place" (Ud 4.8)
"Let us neither be perpetrators nor victims!" (DN26)
"Transition to greatness" (Donald J. Trump)

Despite denials in March, there are rumblings that Eric Holder might be about to enter the race too...

Given the current investigations by Barr, Durham, Horowitz etc. I can't help wondering if Holder is considering a run in the interests of self-preservation. In other words, if Holder runs for the Presidency, he and a complicit media can try to claim that "Trump is locking up his political opponents!" if those investigations and criminal probes unearth anything of interest in relation to his conduct.

"He goes to hell, the one who asserts what didn’t take place" (Ud 4.8)
"Let us neither be perpetrators nor victims!" (DN26)
"Transition to greatness" (Donald J. Trump)

Trump and Bernie don't even like each other, but they share supporters. I think it is due to both being somewhat of extremists (in terms of U.S. politics). It's known as the horseshoe theory where the extremes start to get closer to each other and become somewhat similar.

When I was in high school, my history teacher used to say both "extremes" grow when the system is failing

Disgruntled people can turn either to the right or to the left for anti-establishment voices. That doesn't make these extremes closer to one another politically speaking.

...With the rest of the gang mired in the single digits, the super-rich are beginning to panic. First, billionaire Tom Steyer and now, fellow plutocrat Michael Bloomberg decided to abandon the kingmaker facade altogether and get in the race themselves.

Their desperate bids for the presidency make one thing crystal clear: The 2020 Democratic primary is a referendum on billionaire control of the Democratic Party. At least we can all stop shadow-boxing with the word “moderate.”

Bloomberg has no better chance of becoming president than Howard Schultz, the Starbucks CEO who assembled a campaign operation in January and gave a few disastrous interviews before quietly abandoning his quest. His prospects are also no better than those of ultra-millionaire John Delaney (D-$232 million), who has been steadfastly campaigning in futility in Iowa all year. Bloomberg may well accomplish nothing more than siphoning a few points away from Buttigieg and Biden, ultimately bolstering the very candidates he hopes to crush, namely Sanders and Warren.But the fact that so many super-rich folks are even trying to get into the primary has surfaced a long-brewing contradiction at the heart of the modern Democratic Party, one that’s made the party uniquely vulnerable to President Donald Trump’s buffoonish demagoguery. Most Democrats think of themselves as champions of the little guy. We’re the party of working people and people of color. The Republicans, we like to tell ourselves, are the party of the rich ― silver-spoon 47%-bashers like Mitt Romney and racist rentiers like Trump.

That story papers over the fact that both parties have courted and favored America’s super-rich, over and against the interests of the rest of the country.

Sure, there are differences. Republican politicians will defend any lowlife whose bank book is big enough, from payday lenders to Wall Street CEOs. Democrats, by contrast, court nicer, more progressive-seeming elements of the super-rich. Harvey Weinstein, for instance.

During Bill Clinton’s presidency, when incomes were elevated by an epic stock market bubble, this contradiction could be tolerated, even celebrated. But it is not tenable after the joint debacles of the 2008 financial crisis and the foreclosure-infested recovery. ...

What I like about Jimmy Dore is that he constantly provides present-day examples of the kind of news media shenanigans that Noam Chomsky described more broadly in his reference work Manufacturing Consent

Former President Barack Obama, who has so far taken a neutral position publicly on the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, privately indicated he would speak up to stop Bernie Sanders from becoming the party’s nominee should the Vermont senator make significant gains, Politico reported Tuesday.

Which also tells us the establishment is getting worried about Sanders, who is picking up momentum despite the E. Warren red herring candidacy

Pete Buttigieg answers the question "do you think that taking big money out of politics [i.e. ending the legalization of corruption] includes not taking money off billionaires and closed-door fundraisers?"